Originally posted by General Zod
I'm not sure if you were intentionally trying to twist my words in an attempt to create a straw man argument, or if what we have is a communication breakdown. Regardless, let me reiterate the points I was trying to get across.
1 - I have no problem with a band changing their style (assuming that the change is positive).
2 - I could care less how much a band makes. I never even intimated that.
3 - I have a problem with a band deliberately changing their style, for the sole purpose of making more money, and in the process, selling out their fans (ala Metallica). You would have to be naive to believe that a band like Nevermore is going to sell 5,000,000 CDs without intentionally writing songs geared towards MTV and FM radio. In order to reach the largest audience, you have to cater to the lowest common denominator. A band like Nevermore could not do this, and remain Nevermore. It a similar vein, I agree with Chuck's quote, that Metallica should change their name, because once they sold-out, they ceased to be Metallica.
GZ
Upon your clarification I agree with you GZ. Particularly with #3 above. But, with one caveat: if a band changes (as MetallicA, MegadetH, etc. did) and I still like the music, then I don't really give a damn what the reasons behind the change were. If I hate the new material, then yes, obviously I have issues with why they "turned to the dark side."